Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 9 Nov 2007 09:54:46 -0500 (EST)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: No libc shared lib number bump ?
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.64.0711090952001.16340@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <20071109141155.0ae922a1@deskjail>
References:  <200710180835.18929.thierry@herbelot.com> <47170A83.6050607@FreeBSD.org> <20071018091950.GB1546@nagual.pp.ru> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0710181038360.22190@sea.ntplx.net> <20071109141155.0ae922a1@deskjail>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 9 Nov 2007, Alexander Leidinger wrote:

> Quoting Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> (Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:43:46 -0400 (EDT)):
>
>> (*) libc and other symbol versioned libraries may be bumped
>> again in 8.0 to reset the numbering scheme back to 0 (libc.so.0).
>> It was deemed to late in the game to do this for 7.0.
>
> I'm curious, why do we need to reset it back to .0?

We don't have to.  It would just make things clearer to have all
versioned symbol libraries with the same version number since
they shouldn't ever have to be bumped again.  Solaris has all
their libraries at .1.  We've already used .1, but .0 has never
been used.  obrien suggested it, and it seems to make sense
to me.

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0711090952001.16340>